₦airaland Forum

omonnakoda:
The court is well within its powers to do so . Otherwise we could have frivolous motions ad infinitum.
Please answer the question. How did Umar descend into the case

omonnakoda:
None of this is relevant to what I asked you. You are just showing off.
How did Umar descend into the case as you claimed? that was my question. The time for all this verbiage is at appeal if Umar finds against Saraki. The lower court or any court for that matter has the power to dismiss motions as it sees fit and it is left for the aggrieved to appeal.
Rather than sounding off IS THERE ANY LAWFUL ALTERNATIVE?

omonnakoda:
The judge dismissed the motion and that is the end of it.
Do not argue by distraction widening the discussion to irrelevancies
Give a citation for your JB v Isono as requested
Answer the question ,How did Umar descend into the case?
You show a schoolboy understanding of the term "precedent" The Isheno case was a 3:2 majority judgment and I do not see that case as a benchmark for procedural precedence AT ALL. The only precedents there are those relating to the substantive matter i.e false arrest,defamation and employment rights and not courtroom craft
Perhaps you are referring to Isheno and not Isono?
Anyway I see no relevance of that case here. This is a procedural matter and if Saraki feels aggrieved it is established that he must fist dance this dance and then take his grievances forward to appeal

omonnakoda:
Your argument is funny. Why do you want Saraki killed? What EXACTLY is UMAR doing that is against the principle of fair hearing?What has any of this got to do with Falana. You say Umar showed interest by descending int the matter. What does that mean exactly .How did he descend? With regard to your claim that you take a motion no matter how childish and referencing JB vIsono , please provide a citation because I cannot find it and do not agree. At any rate he DISMISSED the motion and the Defendant can consolidate any dissatisfaction at appeal. To say ALL motions must be "taken" is meaningless .What does "TAKE" mean. A judge is well within his power to dismiss frivolous and time wasting motions and proceed with the substantive matter. Any grievance about conduct of trial should then go to appeal

omonnakoda:
Your argument is funny. Why do you want Saraki killed? What EXACTLY is UMAR doing that is against the principle of fair hearing?What has any of this got to do with Falana. You say Umar showed interest by descending int the matter. What does that mean exactly .How did he descend? With regard to your claim that you take a motion no matter how childish and referencing JB vIsono , please provide a citation because I cannot find it and do not agree. At any rate he DISMISSED the motion and the Defendant can consolidate any dissatisfaction at appeal. To say ALL motions must be "taken" is meaningless .What does "TAKE" mean. A judge is well within his power to dismiss frivolous and time wasting motions and proceed with the substantive matter. Any grievance about conduct of trial should then go to appeal

banio:
The Law is an ass. No wonder if a man is not careful a bitch(ass) will control his life.

But law tire person o. So the law NASS is passing is not recognised by Our Constitution or is the CCT not recognised by any law of the land. Anyway I am just thinking aloud

Cuteamigo1:
well thanks for schooling me. I always wanna learn. as for Saraki whether he gets a fear hearing or not I don't really care because when him and his like decide to loot our country dry and fly the money out to Panama and Swiss banks they don't give us fear hearing at all. if you know what I mean

Barywhyte:
Bro. Let's be patriotic and be fair to this Country! After how many adjournments? So Agabi wasn't fully prepare after 8months in several courts clamoring for this case to be stopped? As for Oluyede, that was shameful script poorly played by Saraki's camp. Again Saraki has sought that the CCT be disqualified from hearing this case and Supreme court threw it away. Now you guys are bouncing on Umar after exhausting all options?

Prince16:
what manner of balderdash!

1. Eyahhhhh...., u want him killed. Why, if not dt u know he's guilty. Yet u believe he won't get "fair hearing" under Umar.

2. U want Umar 2 step down yet u never saw any reason 4 saraki 2 step down as SP!

3. You claim 2 be a lawyer yet u've already found him guilty even b4 conclusion; yet, 4 a judge who would most probably tow ur line, u accuse him of bias?! Hmmmm... Pot calling kettle black!

4. Scams/scums like chukwudi44 is beta dn u cos we already know their stand and dey don't mince words with it!

5. **spits**

#Lier.
#reverse~psychology!
#Green~snake~under~green~grass!


********







Guys beware of snakes like d op!

JuanDeDios:
I agree. But isn't it Saraki and his people who have brought us here with their drawn out shenanigans? Even Lord Diplock would have lost his cool with these people!

Anyway, my real concern. What happens if the judge steps down? And whatever happens, can this same matter be taken to the high court by the FG/EFCC?

Barywhyte:
Oga ur comments here, to some extent baffles me. Tell me wht exactly has Umar done that constitute "unfair hearing" as you are alleging? That he tried to caution a lawyer who tried to disrupt court process? The article above of the "eminent lawyers" lacked substance and is an indication of the fact that money is seriously exchanging hands. These shameless men have all been around and have witnessed the retrogrades of our country even while they were occupying sensitive and powerful positions.

Cuteamigo1:
I like the stance of justice umar danladi on this case and as to how it affects Saraki and him not getting a fair hearing is something am yet to understand. in most cases what this folks mean by fear hearing is the case being swept under the rug and let it business as usual, we'll lai lai.

blackpanda:
[s][/s]

This is nothing but horse shit!

I never insulted u and I certainly wasnt referring to any letter from EFCC. I am sure you can read. Supreme Court judgement is not EFCC letter. They are two different things!

And btw, I dont hate saraki. Nobody hates him. Rather its his illegal actions that necessitate legal sanctions. The supreme court has said there are no legal impediments to the trial. So your noisemaking is quite uncalled for!

Osgilliat:
As a lawyer. You are seeing Saraki as being maltreated using the law. As a citizen we are seeing a crook and a thief that needs to be hang so please don't judge us that we are not a fan of your profession.
The politicians use the stolen money to buy judges and lawyers. As you can see your proffession people following him to court to defend the thief. You and I know so well that if Uman stepped down, Saraki will win this case. He have a lot of money to buy a country.

These politician play dirty and to catch a pig like Saraki you have to get yourself muddy even before you start chasing the pig. That's what Uman is doing. Please let him do this for the sake of Nigerians. We need a big fish as scape goat to send message to the looters.

There is nothing like a fair hearing if you want to catch this looters they are politically wise they will always find a means to undo you.

Whenever we have change in government at the federal level, they won't hesitate to probe the past administration. That's a lesson for them all.

blackpanda:
You claim to be a lawyer but u reason like a layman. The so called "eminent lawyers" are advising the CCT Chairman to go against an issue that has already been decided by the supreme court.
Supreme court has said the trial must go ahead, so your attempt to appeal to emotions rather than reason is ridiculous. And by the way, saraki is not only a super rich man but the no.3 person in this country. So your analogy is pointless!

vatoslocos:
Some of these 'eminent lawyers' have interests in the Saraki case. Justice Belgore(rtd) is like a father to Saraki and both from Ilorin and so has to protect anything affecting Saraki. Justice Oguntade(rtd) also has an axe to grind with Danladi Umar. It was Justice Oguntade who introduced Rasheed Taiwo to Danladi asking that Danladi should help quash the CCT charges against him. Trouble only started after Danladi ruled against Mr Taiwo after Danladi's P.A had allegedly collected almost N2million bribe from Mr Taiwo that he was going to help influence the case.

These two interested parties already tainted the submission of the so called 'eminent lawyers'.

bashydemy:
God bless you jare, I keep asking that those PDP wailers/robot to give me 5 names of PDP strong Senator that will wan to test the power of the Presidency by come forte to be Senate president, By the time DSS/EFCC/ICPC start to dey check their past record some of them will remain silent for life.

IamPatriotic:
A quick glance at the names of the "eminent lawyers" should tell one where they're coming from, men of dishonour and apostles of corruption marauding as statesmen.

To remove EFCC from presidency contro

*Vow to back Saraki

*To confront older senators over juicy committees

By Henry Umoru

STRONG indications emerged early yesterday of a hardening of position by senators who have coalesced into a Group of 77 drawn from various parties and camps to protect what they have dubbed as the integrity of the Senate.The new G77 which had its maiden meeting on Thursday night has meanwhile launched moves to extricate the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC from the control of the presidency in the light of claims by the senators that it had become a tool of the administration.The G77 comprising mostly of new senators it was gathered, also up in arms against older senators who they claim have monopolised the juicy committees of the Senate to the detriment of the newer ones.
The maiden meeting of the G77 was hosted by Senate Minority Leader, Senator Godswill Akpabio who incidentally was not at home at the beginning of the meeting.

The meeting monitored by Saturday Vanguard commenced shortly after 7.00 p.m. on Thursday and ended just before midnight following which some senators also broke up into groups.

36 senators were physically present at the meeting which inside sources disclosed has a membership roll of 77, almost all of them new senators. Remarkably, the group is also putting forward itself as a bulwark for the embattled Senate President, Senator Bukola Saraki with members vowing to defend him against what they alleged as the persecution of the executive branch of government.

The formation of the new group came barely 24 hours after senators resolved in a closed session on Wednesday to put aside all acrimonies and project the institution as one. In that light the senators it was learnt resolved to withdraw all cases against the election of Saraki as the Senate President.

It was also resolved that as a sop to critics that the Senate would withdraw the amendment bill to the Code of Conduct Tribunal Act.

However, that agreement ran into trouble at the G77 meeting on Thursday as senators in the group resolved to push forward an amendment bill to the law establishing the EFCC to among other things remove the president’s right as appointing power and transfer same to the National Judicial Council, NJC.

Besides, the amendment aims to ensure that the minimum qualification for the office of executive chairman of the EFCC would be a Deputy Director General of Police, DIG.

A senator from the former Bendel State is to present the amendment bill which would be expected to be fast tracked.

The senators at the Thursday meeting particularly lamented what they claimed as the way and manner the EFCC was being used to hound what they claimed as perceived opponents of the administration. The case of former governor of Sokoto State, Alhaji Attahiru Bafarawa and his son was given as a particular instance at the meeting as it was claimed that the EFCC rushed to file charges without investigation.

As part of the amendment the EFCC would be compelled to finish investigations before filing charges against anyone, a source at the meeting disclosed.

Noting the determination of the new senators to get their own entitlements in the chamber, a senator who attended the meeting told Saturday Vanguard that the group would frustrate what they described as the over ambitious nature of the older senators who are anointing themselves as those that will take over from the embattled Senate President, Senator Saraki.

The source also disclosed that the G77 came into existence to frustrate any gang up against Senator Saraki’s leadership of the Senate.

Among those sighted at the meeting were Senators Samuel Anyanwu, PDP, Imo East; Clifford Ordia, PDP, Edo Central; Matthew Urhoghide, PDP, Edo South; Ben Murray Bruce, PDP, Bayelsa East; Dino Melaye, APC, Kogi West; Biodun Olujimi, PDP, Ekiti South; Isa Misau, APC, Bauchi Central, among others including Akpabio who came into the meeting not too long before it ended.

989900:
While I partially agree with you and by extension the old justices, OTOH, in the grand scheme of things, then Saraki's tactics worked perfectly well: try bribing the Judge, if he does not bulge, intimidate him, if he still does not cower, destabilize him and get him to react so you can have him off your case for one of yours to come and preside over the case.

What have the wise men in the article got to say about all of Saraki's shenanigans since the onset of this trial?

Or so far, what have they have said about 'paid justice' in our country as a whole?

The likes of antics like this, and the 'get-away-with-anything' modus operandi is the reason why we have all these calamities befallen upon us, and by whatever it takes, a new path has to be created.

Jail Saraki as a deterrent to others -- bottom line, he made false declaration by his own hand.

He is in court, let him clear his name if he is not guilty as charged . . . he has the option to pursue this further to the supreme court -- let him have at it.

blackpanda:
And how much did saraki pay to these "eminent lawyers" for their "support"

Anuofias!

Saraki is jail bound whether he like it or yes

*Fault Supreme Court decision on CCT’s jurisdiction
*Belgore, Uwaifo, Oguntade, Nwabueze, Udechukwu, Ozekhome, others concur
By Clifford NdujiheSOME leading legal luminaries including former justices of the Supreme Court have advised Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT, Mr. Danladi Umar, to withdraw from presiding the ongoing trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki over alleged false assets declaration to ensure fairness in the matter.

The legal giants, who picked holes in the Supreme Court judgement of February 5, 2016 giving the CCT jurisdiction in the Saraki trial, argued that the CCT is not a court of law under our Constitution and cannot be invested with criminal or quasi-criminal jurisdiction.

Eminent lawyers, who shared this view included Justice Salisu Alfa Modibo Belgore (former Chief Justice of Nigeria; Justice George Oguntade (CFR), former Justice of the Supreme Court; Justice Samson Odemwingie Uwaifo, former Justice of the Supreme Court; Prof. Ben Nwabueze, SAN; Chief Nnoruka Udechukwu SAN; Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN; and Mr Olalekan Ojo among others.

The advice was part of the communiqué of the Conference on ‘The Code of Conduct enshrined in the Constitution of Nigeria and its crucial Importance in the fight against Corruption’ held in Lagos on March 24 by the Ben Nwabueze Centre, which was released, yesterday.

There was a mild drama at the CCT trial on Thursday as Danladi Umar, refused to hear the motion filed by Saraki’s counsel on the CCT chairman’s alleged bias. Umar dismissed the application asking him to disqualify himself from the case, saying “that motion as far as the tribunal is concerned is of no consequence; not worthy to be entertained and is hereby thrown away.”

However, the lawyers asked Umar to withdraw on account of the graft allegations against him and the way he has handled the trial so far. They said the following in the communique:

” It is not reasonably to be supposed or be expected that Mr. Danladi Umar can be impartial or unbiased in adjudicating the case between the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) against Saraki. There can be no greater mockery of the whole notion of impartiality in any adjudicatory system than that Umar, with the threat of prosecution and removal from office for alleged corruption by the FRN hanging over his head, should have been allowed to adjudicate as presiding judge in the circumstances of this case.

”Bias on the part of Umar seems to be clearly manifest in all the circumstances surrounding the case. The manner in which the trial was being conducted by Umar manifests also a certain

overzealousness that suggests at least a real likelihood of bias on the part of Umar against Saraki or a lack of impartiality,” they said.

Acknowledging ”unchallengeability of the judgement of the Supreme Court” in the Saraki case

delivered on February 5, 2016, they however said ”the Supreme Court decision on the issue of the jurisdiction of the CCT is inconsistent with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

”The Supreme Court was wrong in holding that the Constitution itself invests the Code of

Conduct Tribunal (CCT) with a quasi-criminal jurisdiction. The Code is, in its essential character, merely a body of rules designed to regulate the civil, not criminal, behaviour of public officers, much in the fashion of the Civil Service Rules.



” The CCT, not being so listed under Section 6(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) as a Court, has no power or jurisdiction, derived from the Constitution, to try, convict and impose punishment on persons for a criminal offence; the decision of the Supreme Court attributing such jurisdiction to it, as jurisdiction derived from the Constitution, is null and void under sections 1(3), 6 and 36 (13) of the Constitution; also any law made by the National Assembly that confers such jurisdiction on the CCT is null and void. The Supreme Court decision on the issue of the jurisdiction of the CCT has no basis in a law validly made by the National Assembly.”

They continued: ”The Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act is glaringly unconstitutional and void because it duplicates relevant provisions of the Constitution, and because some of its provisions purport to vary the provisions of the Constitution. The CCT is not a court of law under our Constitution and cannot be invested with criminal or quasi-criminal jurisdiction.

”The initiation of the criminal prosecution against Dr. Saraki before the CCT by a Deputy Director in the Federal Ministry of Justice at a time when there was no incumbent Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) is invalid and incompetent in law.”

Also, they urged that Saraki be given a fair hearing before a Court of Law where there would not be any likelihood of bias.

They also said that there is need to ensure that decisions of the Apex Court, as a court of last resort, are consistent with each other, and, above all, with the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, as well as with laws validly enacted by the legislature.

omonnakoda:
Whether it should be a full time job is another debate and another discussion . That is not relevant here

So the Senators from Lagos Should keep quiet about Boko Haram because it does not affect them? That is upside down Logic . Senators have a responsibility to their constituents and to NIGERIA . I repeat TO NIGERIA . That is what they swore to. So unless you are telling me otherwise senators are NOT ONLY responsible to their constituents but to NIGERIA and ALL NIGERIANS. Why should a senator from Imo state be concerned about Chibok Girls ? By your logic it is not their business

The fact is that all senators represent all Nigerians, The Senate makes laws on issues in Epe or kaura Namoda, is it only those from Kaura Namoda or Epe that vote on suuch issues? When Lagos State applies for Foreign Loans is it only Lagos Senators that speak.
This specific issue on cars is there a kaura Namoda jeep or an Epe Jeep. Is the opportunity cost of the jeep not affecting everyone.
Let me explain a ver simple concept to you > It is called precedence. If a course of action is proposed and it does not directly affect a senator's constituents at that time and he fails to oppose in the future when it is attempted on his constituents it will be too late. There are few federal laws or actions that are so limited in scope or territory that they do not affect everyone. Finally NO ONE SENATOR can pass any law or take any action without the involvement of others. There is one Senate and NOT 109

bender79:
Ben Bruce is an over hyped immigrant.

prince088:
Hey man. The guy has been cleared since 2014. NASS and others only brought up the matter again simply cos of Saraki.
The EFCC only reinstated that Umar has been cleared.

No matter how this ends with ot without this drama....Saraka is stil gonna appeal. Mind you justice Danladi already made his point

“The point I was making was that when that application was filed, he filed at a time he was not appearing, and this is an issue tried at High Court, and he brought it here,”

And ordered for cross examination to start. How on earth with the so called SAN keep talking and ignore a sitting Judge in his court room?

Bro no case in this....

By the way the judgr does not have to give the exact time requested for adjournment. He gave them till 27th.
So much time have been wasted by so many rascal injunctioncourtsed to stall the trial....and back and forth running to different courts.

Am sorry using all this as a strong base of appeal is not feasible.

prince088:
Hey man. The guy has been cleared since 2014. NASS and others only brought up the matter again simply cos of Saraki.
The EFCC only reinstated that Umar has been cleared.

No matter how this ends with ot without this drama....Saraka is stil gonna appeal. Mind you justice Danladi already made his point

“The point I was making was that when that application was filed, he filed at a time he was not appearing, and this is an issue tried at High Court, and he brought it here,”

And ordered for cross examination to start. How on earth with the so called SAN keep talking and ignore a sitting Judge in his court room?

Bro no case in this....

By the way the judgr does not have to give the exact time requested for adjournment. He gave them till 27th.
So much time have been wasted by so many rascal injunctioncourtsed to stall the trial....and back and forth running to different courts.

Am sorry using all this as a strong base of appeal is not feasible.

ISpiksDaTroof:
What's "content"?

paragon40:
big point bro...the question that comes to mind is that will d Appeal Court, allow the argument that bn "investigated" by a commission shows that one has a link with the Govt and such link affected the judgment.. the court might look at it from this angle, looking at the amount of evidence supplied by the prosecution will the judgment have bn different if the case was assigned to another judge...what do u think?

diva90:
It's not proper! It's not done in developed countries where there is proper law and order and the judiciary is highly revered